FMLA Technical question

[c0bra969]

Thanks for reading my thread. First off, please don't paste the link to the DOL site because I've read it and several others over this issue I want some other opinion and maybe some personal experience if possible.

My wife worked for a hospital for about 2 years full time then was laid off because of damages due from a hurricane. They closed her hospital, they said it was for good. She got another job for about six months then was rehired by her old hospital that she was laid off from once they got repairs finished and admitted it would re-open. She has been there about 3 months now full-time and we are expecting our first baby in a few weeks. They told her she dosen't qualify for short term disabililty because she hasnt been there 6 months, o.k., then they told her since she hasnt worked there for a year she dosent qualify for FMLA and her position may be terminated, "but she can reapply". (we dont think they are doing that but we want to know if she qualifies so they HAVE to hold her job)

I have found MULTIPLE sources saying that your employment can be broken for up to seven years, and your old, along with your "new time" will count towards your 12 mos. and 1250 hrs. as long as you worked there a full 12 months the first time before you quit, laid off, whatever.

So, does she qualify?


Thanks in advance,
Jarod

 

[Patricia_Young]

The law says you only have to be employed one year total (breaks in service not considered). However, the law also says that the 1,250 hours worked must be within the immediately preceding 12 months (or whatever annual calculation basis the employer uses). The employment requirement is in total. The hours worked requirement is not.

 

[c0bra969]

Well, shes been there for 12 months no matter what calendar system they use, and it doesn't matter which 12 months they take she will have 1250 hours in them no matter how they cut it.

The DOL lady made it sound like since she's been there for 3 months since they reopened she would had to have put in 1250 hrs in those 3 months, which is almost impossible.

So Patricia you're saying that the in the 3 months she's been there this time, and the 9 months she was there BEFORE they shut down (= 12 months) she has to have worked 1250 hrs., since these are the 12 months immediately preceding her leave, and she has. (Or if they choose to use the "calendar" year before they closed she will STILL have 1250 hrs.)

So she qualifies.

 

[Patricia_Young]

The 9 months before they shut down for a year don't count for purposes of the hours requirement.

OK, let me get the facts straight. She worked from when to when, was off from when to when, came back and has been working when to when.

 

[c0bra969]

She was hired in Mid '06 and was laid off Jan. 19, '09. She was rehired in October 09' and currently works there.

So she worked there about 2 years, was laid off for 9 months, and has worked there for 3 months. All of it was full-time.


We doubt they are going to terminate her position, but I just want to know if she qualifies in case they try something. Noone, including her HR dept. seems to know.

 

[Patricia_Young]

She meets the one year employment requirement. She does not meet the hours requirement. If they use a calendar year basis, she would have had to have worked 1,250 total hours from 1/1/09 to 1/19/09 and 10/09 through current. Even assuming 10/1/09 through 1/21/10, that would be only about 19 weeks total, and at 40 hours per week, that's only 760 hours.

 

[c0bra969]

But there's still the chance they dont use the calendar year? haha.


Thanks,
Jarod

 

[Patricia_Young]

There is, but that wouldn't help her either. Let's say they used the rolling method and let's say she had to go out today. That means 1,250 hours from 1/21/09 through 1/20/10.

Sorry.